ebook img

North Fork by Two timber sale project environmental assessment [electronic resource] PDF

2008·5 MB·English
Save to my drive
Quick download
Download
Most books are stored in the elastic cloud where traffic is expensive. For this reason, we have a limit on daily download.

Preview North Fork by Two timber sale project environmental assessment [electronic resource]

NORTH FORK BY TWO TIMBER SALE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT March 31, 2008 Department of Natural Resources and Conservation - Stillwater Unit NORTH FORK BY 2 TIMBER SALE PROJECT VICINITY MAP NORTH FORK BY TWO PROPOSED TIMBER SALE PROJECT FINDING An Interdisciplinary Team (ID Team) 77-5-222, Montana Codes has completed the Environmental Annotated (MCA). Assessment (EA) for the proposed 2) Improve the long-term North Fork by Two Timber Sale productivity of timber Project. stands by increasing vigor, The project area is located on 2 reducing the incidence of sections of State land in Flathead insect infestations and County (see VICINITY MAP [inside disease infections, and front cover] for their general regenerating portions of the locations). Specifically, the stands where growth is project is located in Section 16, decreasing. Actions would T37N, R22W, and Section 36, T36N, be done in a manner that R22W. Revenue generated from these maintains site productivity lands would benefit the Common and favors the retention and Schools Trust. regeneration of appropriate species mixes (desired After a thorough review of the EA, future conditions project file, public correspondence, [Administrative Rules of Montana statutes, State Forest Land Montana [ARM] 36.11.405]). Management Plan (SFLMP), and adopted rules, I have made the following 3 3) Reduce the potential of decisions: wildfires along the North Fork Road and in stands 1. ALTERNATIVE SELECTED: adjacent to private Two alternatives are presented ownership and residences by and were fully analyzed in the reducing forest fuel EA: loadings. • The No-Action Alternative 4) Secure permanent access into includes existing activities, State lands through cost- but does not include a timber share agreements with U.S. harvest. Forest Service (USFS) and purchase easements from • The Action Alternative proposes adjacent private landowners. to: 5) Minimize the visual impacts 1) Harvest 2 to 3 million board of timber harvesting and feet (MMbf) of sawtimber to road building on State lands (a) generate revenue for the in the project area. appropriate school trusts and (b) contribute a 6) Reduce the spread of noxious sufficient amount of sawlog weeds with a monitoring and volume to meet the treatment program. requirements of sustained yield for the DNRC timber- management program, as mandated by State Statute I have selected the Action diseases, fires, or wind before Alternative with the following value is lost to decay, requirements and for the provided such harvesting is following reasons: economically warranted (MCA 77- 5-207). • Mitigations and specifications identified in the EA will be • The analyses of identified implemented as prescribed, as issues did not reveal will the standard mitigations information to persuade DNRC to listed in APPENDIX B - choose the No-Action STIPULATIONS AND Alternative prior to this SPECIFICATIONS. decision. • The Action Alternative meets • The Action Alternative includes the PURPOSE OF PROPOSED ACTION, activities to address concerns (Page I-1) and PROPOSED expressed by the public and OBJECTIVES (Page I-2); the local government entities with specific project objectives are jurisdiction; these include, listed on page I-2 of the EA. but are not limited to, the following: • The lands involved in this project are held by the State 1) The project is designed to of Montana in trust for the not harvest where support of specific beneficiary potentially sensitive plant institutions. The Department communities exist within of Natural Resources and wetland complexes. Portions Conservation (DNRC) is required of the project area were by law to administer these surveyed by a botanist to trust lands to produce the find and document the largest measure of reasonable presence of plant species of and legitimate return over the concern as ranked by Montana long run (Enabling Act of Natural Heritage Program February 22, 1889; 1972 Montana (MNHP). The botanist Constitution, Article X, observed no sensitive plant Section 11; and, 77-1-202, species. Additionally, MCA). The SFLMP and associated project activities will not rules provide the management take place in or immediately philosophy and framework to adjacent to the large evaluate which alternative wetland complex in the Mud would maximize real income Lake Section; harvest units while sustaining the production have been designed to of long-term income. protect all wetlands involved. • On March 13, 2003, DNRC adopted Administrative Rules for Forest 2) The project is designed to Management (ARM 36.11.401 retain trees of particular through 450). This project is species, age class, and designed in accordance with stocking densities. these Rules. Additionally, postharvest activities such as planting • The proposed timber sale and site preparation are project contributes to the designed to provide for harvest level mandated by State regeneration. These actions Statute (Montana Codes should move the timber Annotated [MCA] 77-5-222). stands being entered toward • DNRC is required to salvage desired future conditions. timber damaged by insects, 3) Snags, snag recruits, and and postharvest treatments course woody debris will be should reduce the risk of retained in the area to large, intensive, stand- provide for important replacement wildfires on wildlife habitat. Public State lands and for adjacent access for motorized use neighbors. (Page III-8) will not change; thus, Refer to APPENDIX B - minimal change to elk STIPULATIONS AND security and grizzly bear SPECIFICATIONS for a list of security areas are common mitigations applied to anticipated (Pages III-43 timber sale projects. and III-61). 2. SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACTS 4) With the location and design of harvest units and For the following reasons, I find proposed transportation that implementing the Action systems, no fisheries Alternative will not have resources in the Mud Lake significant impacts on the human analysis area are expected environment: to be affected by actions • I find that no impacts are associated with the action regarded as severe, enduring, alternative. No direct or geographically widespread, or indirect impacts to the frequent. Further, I find that presence or distribution of the quantity and quality of native bull trout, westslope various resources, including cutthroat trout, or sculpin any that may be considered are expected in the Moose unique or fragile, will not be Creek analysis area (Page adversely affected to a III-30 and III-32). significant degree. I find no 5) Approximately $393,234 will precedent for future actions be generated and deposited that would cause significant into the account of the impacts, and I find no conflict Common Schools Trust; with local, State, or Federal approximately $68,250 will laws, requirements, or formal be deposited into the Forest plans. In summary, I find that Improvement account. (Page the identified adverse impacts III-35) will be avoided, controlled, or 6) State, private, and USFS mitigated by the design of the haul roads used for project project to the extent that the activities will be impacts are not significant. maintained to comply with • Locally Adopted Environmental Best Management Practices Plans and Goals – In June 1996, (BMPs). Grading, seeding, DNRC began a phased-in and dust abatement will be implementation of the SFLMP. conducted as necessary. The SFLMP establishes the (Page II-5) Agency’s philosophy for the 7) Proposed harvest treatments management of forested trust will reduce stocking land. In May 2003, DNRC densities and remove dead adopted rules concerning the trees from existing timber SFLMP. The SFLMP philosophy stands. Postharvest hazard and associated rules are reduction, site preparation, incorporated in the design of and stand improvement work the proposed project. will reduce fuel loads. The combination of both harvest • Recreational Activities – 3. SHOULD DNRC PREPARE AN Recreational opportunities will ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT continue and will not be (EIS)? negatively affected by the Based on the following proposed project. considerations, I find that an • Precedent Setting and EIS does not need to be prepared: Cumulative Impacts – The • The EA adequately addresses the project area is located on issues identified during State-owned lands that are project development and “principally valuable for the displays the information needed timber that is on them or for to make the decisions. growing timber or for watershed protection” (MCA 77-1-402). • Evaluation of the potential impacts of the proposed North • Taken individually and Fork by Two Timber Sale Project cumulatively, the proposed indicates that no significant activities are common practices impacts would occur. and no project activities are being conducted on important • The ID Team provided adequate fragile or unique sites. opportunities for public review and comment. Public concerns • The proposed project conforms were incorporated into the to the management philosophies project design and analysis of of DNRC and is in compliance impacts. with existing laws, rules, policies, and standards applicable to this type of proposed action. Brian Manning Unit Manager Stillwater State Forest March 31, 2008 TABLE OF CONTENTS VICINITY MAP (back of front cover) FINDING CHAPTER I — PURPOSE AND NEED Introduction to Proposed Action................................... I-1 Purpose of Proposed Action........................................ I-1 Objectives of Proposal............................................ I-2 Environmental Assessment (EA) Process............................. I-2 Proposed Schedule of Activities................................... I-3 Other Agencies with Jurisdiction/Permit Requirements.............. I-3 Other Environmental Reviews Related to the Project................ I-3 Issues and Concerns............................................... I-4 Issues Dropped from Further Consideration......................... I-6 CHAPTER II — ALTERNATIVES Introduction...................................................... II-1 Development of Alternatives....................................... II-1 Alternative Descriptions.......................................... II-2 Prescription Treatments........................................... II-7 Mitigations....................................................... II-8 Summary of Environmental Effects.................................. II-12 CHAPTER III—EXISTING ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES Introduction...................................................... III-1 Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Effects.......................... III-1 Vegetation Analysis............................................... III-2 Introduction ................................................... III-2 Background ..................................................... III-2 Analysis Methods ............................................... III-2 Analysis Area .................................................. III-2 Covertypes and Age Classes ..................................... III-3 Insects and Diseases ........................................... III-6 Forest Fuels ................................................... III-7 Noxious Weeds .................................................. III-8 Soils Analysis.................................................... III-10 Introduction ................................................... III-10 Analysis Methods ............................................... III-10 Analysis Area .................................................. III-10 Existing Conditions ............................................ III-11 Alternative Effects to Soils ................................... III-11 Watershed and Hydrology Analysis.................................. III-18 Introduction ................................................... III-18 Analysis Methods ............................................... III-18 Analysis Area .................................................. III-18 Existing Conditions ............................................ III-18 Alternative Effects to Watershed and Hydrology ................. III-21 Fisheries Analysis Summary........................................ III-26 Objective ...................................................... III-26 Analysis Area .................................................. III-26 Analysis Methods ............................................... III-28 Existing Conditions ............................................ III-29 Environmental Effects to Fisheries ............................. III-30 Economic Analysis................................................. III-34 Methods ........................................................ III-34 Existing Condition ............................................. III-34 Alternative Effects to Economics ............................... III-35 Wildlife Analysis................................................. III-38 Introduction ................................................... III-38 Analysis Area .................................................. III-39 Analysis Methods ............................................... III-39 Coarse-Filter Assessment ....................................... III-40 Fine-Filter Assessment ......................................... III-44 Threatened and Endangered Species ............................ III-44 Sensitive Species ............................................ III-54 Elk Security ................................................... III-60 APPENDIX A - REFERENCES APPENDIX B - STIPULATIONS AND SPECIFICATIONS APPENDIX C - LIST OF PREPARERS APPENDIX D - GLOSSARY ACRONYMS (front of back cover) NORTH FORK BY TWO PROPOSED TIMBER SALE PROJECT CHAPTER I PURPOSE AND NEED INTRODUCTION TO PROPOSED ACTION harvesting activities have been The Department of Natural Resources completed. and Conservation (DNRC), Stillwater If the action alternative is Unit, is proposing the North Fork by selected, DNRC would proceed with Two Timber Sale Project. The the acquisition of a cost-share proposed action is to harvest timber easement with the U.S. Forest and acquire easements to the harvest Service (USFS). Access to the north areas. The proposed timber harvest side of the Moose Creek Section is located in Section 16, T37N, R22W (Section 36) is through private (the Mud Lake Section is located property and 30 feet of USFS-managed approximately 16 miles northwest of land; the ultimate objective of DNRC Polebridge), and Section 36, T36N, is to obtain a permanent easement, R22W (the Moose Creek Section is although at the time of project located approximately 6 miles implementation, a temporary road use northwest of Polebridge). The gross agreement may be the avenue to sale area encompasses 1,280 acres of harvesting the timber. State Common School trust lands in Flathead County (see VICINITY MAP PURPOSE OF PROPOSED ACTION inside the front cover). The The lands involved in the proposed easements DNRC proposes to acquire project are held in trust by the are within the North Fork Flathead State of Montana for the support of River drainage and are displayed in specific beneficiary institutions, CHAPTER II, FIGURE II-1 – ROAD such as public schools, State EASEMENT MAP and TABLE II-2 – DNRC colleges and universities, and other EASEMENT AND RIGHT-OF-WAY REQUESTS. specific State institutions, such as Two alternatives, an action and a the School for the Deaf and Blind no-action alternative, are proposed. (Enabling Act of February 22, 1889; If the action alternative to harvest 1972 Montana Constitution, Article timber is selected, an estimated 2 X, Section 11). The Board of Land to 3 million board feet (MMbf) of Commissioners (Land Board) and DNRC timber would be harvested from are legally required to administer approximately 580 acres using a these trust lands to produce the variety of silvicultural treatments largest measure of reasonable and (refer to CHAPTER II – ALTERNATIVES legitimate long-term return for for maps and descriptions of these beneficiary institutions silvicultural treatments). The type (Section 77—1-202, Montana Codes of treatment selected for each stand Annotated [MCA]). would depend on the existing On May 30, 1996, DNRC released the condition and the desired future Record of Decision on the State condition for that particular stand. Forest Land Management Plan (SFLMP). Along with existing roads, 0.25 The Land Board approved the SFLMP’s miles of new road and less than 1.0 implementation on June 17, 1996. On mile of short spur road would access March 13, 2003, the Department the proposed harvest units. The adopted the Forest Management Rules spur roads would be built to minimum (Administrative Rules of Montana standards and reclaimed after [ARM] 36.11.401 through 450). The SFLMP outlines the management philosophy, and the proposal will be agreements with USFS and adjacent implemented according to the Forest private landowners. Management Rules. The philosophy • Minimize the visual impacts of is: timber harvesting and road “Our premise is that the best way building on State lands in the to produce long-term income for project area. the trust is to manage intensively for healthy and • Reduce the spread of noxious weeds biologically diverse forests. with a monitoring and treatment Our understanding is that a program. diverse forest is a stable forest that will produce the most ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (EA) reliable and highest long-term PROCESS revenue stream… In the foreseeable future, timber EA DEVELOPMENT management will continue to be This EA was prepared in compliance our primary source of revenue and our primary tool for achieving with the Montana Environmental biodiversity objectives.” Policy Act (MEPA) of 1971. The intent of MEPA is to foster better OBJECTIVES OF PROPOSAL decisions and wise actions by ensuring that relevant environmental DNRC has set the following specific information is available to the project objectives to meet the SFLMP public officials and citizens before and Forest Management Rules: decisions are made and actions are • Harvest 2 to 3 MMbf of sawtimber taken. MEPA requires the State to generate revenue for the Common government to consider environmental School trust and contribute a impacts in its decisionmaking sufficient amount of sawlog volume process. to meet the requirements of PUBLIC SCOPING sustained yield for the DNRC timber-management program, as The public scoping process begins mandated by State Statute 77-5- during the initial stage of an EA 222, MCA. and is used to inform the public that a State agency is proposing an • Improve the long-term productivity action. The public is invited to of timber stands by increasing identify issues of concern and stand vigor, reducing the suggest alternatives to the proposed incidence of insect infestations action. and disease infections, and In February 2007, DNRC solicited regenerating portions of the public participation in the North stands where growth is declining. Fork by Two Timber Sale Project by Silviculture prescriptions would advertising in the Hungry Horse News be designed to maintain site weekly newspaper and sending an productivity and favor the initial proposal to neighboring retention and regeneration of landowners. appropriate species mixes (desired future conditions [ARM An Initial Proposal, which described 36.11.405]). the proposed action, was mailed to individuals, agencies, industry • Reduce the potential of wildfires representatives, and other along the North Fork Road and in organizations that have expressed stands adjacent to private interest in Stillwater State ownership and residences by Forest’s management activities. reducing forest fuel loadings. The comment period for the Initial • Secure permanent access into State Proposal was 30 days. Received were lands through cost-share

See more

The list of books you might like

Most books are stored in the elastic cloud where traffic is expensive. For this reason, we have a limit on daily download.